The surge comes to Washington

The surge against the Administration has begun in earnest this week. Smelling a political defeat (instead of the military defeats they enjoy), the Democats have begun clinging to their only remaining weapons – deceit and the media. Eric Pfeifer in the Washington Times reports this morning that Joe Biden on Meet the Press yesterday, changed horses in midstream and declared that we need a date certain withdrawal;

“I really respect him, but I think he’s dead flat wrong,” Mr. Biden said when asked about Gen. Petraeus’ expected recommendations. “I will insist on a firm beginning to withdraw the troops, and I will insist on a target date to get American combat forces out.”

Mr. Biden voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq and previously advised against setting a specific timetable for the withdrawal of American forces.

If he figures that Gen. Petraeus is wrong, why’d Biden vote for his confirmation a scant few months ago? Why is Biden bothering to listen to Petraeus?

According to the Wall Street Journal’s Neil King and Greg Jaffe, Biden has been beseiged by reality, though;

Senate Democrats, propelled by strong opposition to the war within their party, have tried for months to force a swifter withdrawal of U.S. forces. Those efforts won some Republican support, but not enough to overcome a presidential veto. Democrats now acknowledge there is little to no chance that enough moderate Republicans will defect to force a major change in strategy.

“Unless we get 67 votes to override a veto there is nothing we can do to end this war,” said Sen. Joseph Biden, (D., Del.) on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Nothing he can do except keep talking down the war. The Washington Times’ Sharon Behn reports that the troops in Iraq say the surge is working but only barely;

Many U.S. soldiers on the ground in Baghdad caution that improved security in the capital city will last only as long as the surge. If American troops were to leave, they say, the insurgents could be back within hours.

U.S. forces broke up insurgent networks and curtailed the ability of terrorists to strike, said Sgt. Gregory Rayho, 30, of the 2nd Battalion, 3rd Infantry Regiment, Stryker Brigade Combat Team, the recipient of three Purple Hearts during his time in Iraq.

His overall assessment is upbeat: “It is my opinion that the surge is working.”

But he also said continued success in the Dora neighborhood of Baghdad, where his fellow soldiers patrol, depends on the continued presence of American troops. Should they be withdrawn, the future could be deadly.

Why would the terrorists flow back into the void left by Americans? Is it because they anticipate a military victory? Of course not – they know the desparation of the situtation would only encourage the fifth columnists here in the US to whine and wring their hands and work against our victory with deception and lies.

All for the sake of politics, according to Biden as quoted in the Washington Post;

“What we have done is made it very difficult for Republicans to continue to hide on whether they agree with the president or not on Iraq,” said Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), describing the political gain Democrats think they have achieved since the beginning of the year. “Whether or not they’ll take that final step and actually break by actually overriding a veto, if we ever get to that, or break by supporting very tough language that constricts his movement, remains to be seen.”

They haven’t made it difficult for terrorists in Iraq or terrorists in Afghanistan, or terrorists in Guantanamo – they’ve made it difficult for Republicans in Washington.

And the Iraqis are asking us to stay, asking us for more time (hardly sounds like an occupation by “crusaders” does it);

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki told lawmakers Monday that Iraqi forces were not ready to take over security from the U.S. military across the country.

“There have been tangible improvements in security in the recent period in Baghdad and the provinces but it is not enough,” he told parliament.

“Despite the security improvement, we still need more efforts and time in order for our armed forces to be able to take over security in all Iraqi provinces from the multinational forces that helped us in a great way in fighting terrorism and outlaws.”

But the Democrats would rather heed the advice of bin Laden (who sounds more like Al Gore everytime he broadcasts a new video, by the way) and leave the Middle East – the source of most of the world’s problems for decades. The Washington Post puts more emphasis on Ambassador Crocker’s report – because it will show less progress in the last three months;

Yet despite the spotlight focused on what has become known as the Petraeus report, the testimony of the man sitting beside Petraeus at the witness table, Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker, may carry far more import for the long-term future of Iraq and the U.S. presence there. With little progress to recount in how the Iraqis have used the political “breathing space” that Bush promised his war strategy would create, Crocker’s inevitably more nuanced appeal for time and patience is likely to be the tougher sell.

Yeah, cuz three months of piecing together a political solution for Iraq is an eternity, right? Petraeus will give the good news that the first part of the plan for Iraq is working - the part that needed to be accomplished first.

According to Kamangir’s translation, the Democrats have already succeeded in emboldening the Iranians;

The newly-assigned commander of the IRGC stated, “If the enemy succeeded in securing Iraq, they would definitely attack Iran. Fortunately, and thanks to Muslims of the region, they failed in this conspiracy.” He added “If they are not sure about their plans, that’s because of their failure in Iraq”. “The Islamic Iran has turned into a great regional power…and all world powers are anxious about the power of the Islamic Republic of Iran”

Category: Antiwar crowd, Foreign Policy, Politics, Terror War